Podcast Summary
Paul Alexander's Insights on the Early Days of the Pandemic: Paul Alexander, a Trump Organization figure, shared his firsthand account of meetings with Fauci, describing potential mass fraud and societal value loss during the pandemic's early days. Ellen Young emphasized the importance of supporting truthful information disseminators.
During the early days of the pandemic, Paul Alexander, a key figure in the Trump Organization, had firsthand experience with the decision-making process. He shared shocking insights from his meetings with Fauci and described the situation as a potential mass fraud. Ellen Young, a supporter, emphasized the importance of supporting those who disseminate crucial information. Paul himself shared his personal experience of being exposed to COVID-19 without a vaccine and without implementing lockdowns or masks. He believes that the societal value added by the pandemic is questionable, and many people have lost faith in the medical profession due to its handling of the situation.
Age-risk stratified approach to COVID-19: The speaker advocates for holding those responsible for COVID-19 mismanagement accountable through legal action, emphasizing economic and emotional harm caused by strict guidelines and lack of personal choice for low-risk individuals.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a segment of the population who believed that lockdowns and vaccinations were unnecessary for those with low risk and good health. The speaker, who did not get ill or get vaccinated, argues that an age-risk stratified approach could have been used instead. He believes that those who followed strict COVID-19 guidelines were hurt economically and emotionally, and that those in power should be held accountable for their actions. The speaker compares the situation to other instances where those responsible for fraud, poisoning, and false flags have not been held accountable. He emphasizes the importance of legal action and holding those responsible financially and criminally to prevent similar situations from happening again. The speaker's perspective is that unless individuals take legal action and hold those responsible accountable, nothing will change. The Health and Human Services Department (HHS) in the US is similar to the UK's Ministry of Health, with the Secretary of HHS serving as the head of the department, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) being a part of HHS.
Role of HHS during COVID-19 pandemic: HHS served as a central hub for various health and human service agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic, with sub-offices facilitating direct communication between high-level officials and Congress.
The Health and Human Services (HHS) department in the United States government serves as an umbrella organization for various health and human service agencies. These agencies, including the CDC, NIH, NIAID, and FDA, report to HHS. During the COVID-19 pandemic, sub-offices of these agencies were set up within the HHS building to facilitate direct communication between high-level officials and Congress, making the system more efficient. The speaker's role within HHS was significant, as they worked closely with heads of these agencies, such as Dr. Robert Redfield and Dr. Steven Hahn. Despite initially thinking their role was not senior, the speaker's background in epidemiology and previous work with the World Health Organization contributed to their appointment to HHS during the pandemic.
Handling the influx of COVID-19 data at WHO: During the pandemic's early stages, WHO lacked infrastructure and expertise to handle data, requiring an evidence-based medicine expert to evaluate research and dispel confusion.
During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a significant lack of infrastructure and expertise at the World Health Organization (WHO) to handle the influx of data and information regarding the new virus. The speaker, who served as an evidence synthesis person for WHO, was tasked with gathering and making sense of information from various sources and disseminating it to the organization's director general. At the time, there was a lot of confusion and uncertainty about the virus, and there was a need for someone with expertise in evidence-based medicine to evaluate the quality of research being conducted. Later, the speaker was approached by the US government to serve as a senior pandemic adviser to the assistant secretary of the Health and Human Services (HHS) due to their expertise and ability to provide unbiased information to the task force. The speaker also noted that there were efforts within the deep state to undermine the Trump administration's response to the pandemic.
Allegations of Deliberate Sabotage during Trump's Pandemic Response: During the Trump administration, some officials admitted to deliberately slowing down the pandemic response to harm Trump's reputation, while the importance of preserving executive privilege and confidentiality was emphasized.
During the Trump administration, there were allegations of officials deliberately withholding information and slowing down the process to undermine the president. Dr. Deborah Birx, a member of the Coronavirus Task Force, admitted to doing so in her book. The effects of the pandemic response, particularly the lockdowns and school closures, harmed many people and businesses, and Trump took the blame. Some argue that this was a deliberate attempt to fail the pandemic response and harm Trump's reputation. The executive privilege and confidentiality of presidential conversations also came up as a topic, emphasizing the importance of preserving the privacy of presidential discussions.
Impact of Pandemic Response on 2020 Election Results: The 2020 election results were influenced by the pandemic response, with debates ongoing over Trump's handling vs. health officials' advice and the impact of false positives and unequal risk on public compliance.
The 2020 election results were influenced by various factors, including the pandemic response led by then-President Trump. While some believe he bears responsibility for the lockdowns and their economic consequences, others argue that he was misled by health officials like Fauci and Birx who exaggerated the risks and pushed for unnecessary shutdowns. The discussion also touched upon the issue of false positive COVID tests and the unequal risk of severe outcomes, which were used to scare the public into compliance. Overall, the conversation highlighted the complexity of the pandemic response and the importance of clear communication and accurate information.
Misinformation about PCR testing during Trump's presidency: Clear and accurate communication is essential during crises to make informed decisions, as misinformation about PCR testing led to potentially inflated infection and death projections, impacting economic decisions.
The PCR testing process played a crucial role in the pandemic response during Trump's presidency, with experts like Fauci and Brooks misleading Trump about the nature of the test results. The PCR test was not a diagnostic test, but a process that could detect non-infectious viral fragments after 24 cycles. This misinformation led Trump to make the difficult decision to shut down the economy based on potentially inflated infection and death projections. The situation presented a challenging decision for Trump, as he had to trust these experts or risk the health and lives of millions. Despite the hindsight that we have now, it's unlikely that Trump or anyone else would have made a different decision with the information available at the time. The key takeaway is that the importance of accurate and transparent communication in times of crisis cannot be overstated.
Political figures and scientists clashed over COVID-19 response: Opinions vary on the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic response, with some criticizing Fauci and Birx for alleged obfuscation, while others see it as a complex issue with implications for public health and the economy.
The COVID-19 pandemic response became a contentious issue between political figures and scientists, with Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx being criticized for their handling of the crisis. Some argue that they intentionally obfuscated information to make life difficult for then-President Trump and facilitate the introduction of vaccines. However, it's essential to note that opinions on the matter vary, and it's crucial to consider multiple perspectives. At a high level, some believe the pandemic response was a "fraud" driven by an overcycled PCR test, leading to unnecessary lockdowns, school closures, and business closures. Despite this, the survival rate for individuals under 75 years old was extremely high, with an infection-free target rate of 0.05%. Regardless of personal opinions, it's clear that the pandemic response was a complex issue with significant implications for public health and the economy.
Allegations of inaccuracies and misinformation during COVID-19 pandemic: Public health officials faced allegations of spreading false info about virus transmission & lockdowns, using fear to manipulate public acceptance.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were allegations that some public health officials, including Dr. Fauci, knew about inaccuracies in testing methods and misinformation about the virus's transmission, but continued to promote lockdowns and other restrictive measures. This included false claims about asymptomatic transmission and the effectiveness of early treatments. The speaker suggests that these officials used fear of contagion, which is difficult to see or combat, to manipulate the public into accepting these measures. Despite this, President Trump was in a difficult position to challenge these experts publicly due to their perceived authority and the political climate of an election year. The speaker also mentions attempts to bring in alternative voices to counter Fauci's messages but that these efforts were met with resistance. Ultimately, the speaker believes that transparency and open debate about scientific findings and their implications are crucial for making informed decisions in a crisis.
Power struggles between political figures and career officials during pandemic: Political biases and self-interest prioritized over greater good by some career officials during pandemic response, leading to power struggles and inefficient use of resources.
During the height of the pandemic, there were significant power struggles between political figures and career officials within government agencies. The speaker recounted instances where they were threatened for advocating against mask usage for children and for challenging the deep-rooted anti-Trump sentiment among career officials. Despite their expertise, the speaker believed that these officials prioritized their own interests and political leanings over the greater good. The building housing the pandemic response team was mostly empty, and many career officials were underworked yet highly paid. The speaker also shared their experience of being befriended due to their accent and being used as a confidant to understand the inner workings of the deep state within these agencies. Overall, the speaker's experiences highlight the complex power dynamics and political biases that existed within the government during the pandemic response.
Lack of clear, evidence-based decision-making during COVID-19 pandemic: Making decisions without scientific evidence during a crisis can lead to significant negative consequences for businesses and individuals.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a lack of clear, evidence-based decision-making, and individuals like Dr. Scott Atlas and Paul Alexander attempted to introduce science to the process. However, they faced opposition and were even dismissed. A notable example is the 6-foot social distancing rule, which was admittedly made up with no scientific basis. This rule led to significant implications for businesses and individuals, causing closures and hardships. It's crucial to ensure that decisions made during a crisis are grounded in sound scientific evidence to minimize negative consequences.
COVID-19: Balancing Public Health and Personal Choices: Individuals faced tough decisions between vaccines and jobs, leading to health issues or unemployment. Tensions arose between experts and the White House over public health messages.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were individuals who faced difficult choices between adhering to mandated vaccines and potentially losing their jobs. Some people, desperate to support their families, chose to get vaccinated despite medical concerns, leading to serious health issues. Meanwhile, others refused to comply and faced the consequence of being laid off. The discussion also touched upon the role of the White House in aligning public health messages with the President's statements, which led to tension between experts and the administration. The speaker, Paul, shared his experience of being included in an email chain where he was instructed to align his messages with the White House's position, but he disagreed with the science behind the school closures and mask mandates for children. This disagreement led to heated exchanges, and Paul eventually resigned due to the pressure to conform. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities and implications of COVID-19 policies and the importance of open dialogue and respect for differing perspectives.
Suppression of dissenting views in scientific debates during the pandemic: Scientific debates during the pandemic were marked by attempts to suppress dissenting views, including public campaigns to discredit scientists like Dr. Marik, who advocated for natural immunity and herd immunity through exposure to the virus. Open scientific debate is crucial for advancing knowledge and informing public health policies.
During the early stages of the pandemic, there were ongoing debates among scientists and officials regarding the effectiveness of masks and school closures. Dr. Paul Marik, a scientist, recounts a conversation with CDC and NIH officials who warned him that his views opposing these measures would lead to a public campaign to destroy his reputation. This campaign, which included leaked emails, was aimed at discrediting him and preventing the public from listening to his perspective. Despite the controversy, Dr. Marik's views on natural immunity and the importance of reaching herd immunity through exposure to the virus have since gained wider acceptance in the scientific community. The incident highlights the importance of open scientific debate and the potential for suppression of dissenting views in the public discourse on health policies.
Orchestrated campaign to make Trump look incompetent and promote mail-in voting: During the pandemic, entities including deep state, academia, and media spread misinformation, falsely accused Trump advisors, and created a hostile media environment to control the narrative and promote mail-in voting, silencing opposing voices
During the pandemic, there was a plan orchestrated by various entities, including the deep state, academia, and the media, to make President Trump look incompetent and to promote mail-in voting. This was done by spreading misinformation about the pandemic response, leaking false accusations against Trump's advisors, and creating a hostile media environment. One advisor, Dr. Paul Alexander, was falsely accused of wanting children to be infected and killed. The media ran with this story, causing Alexander to go into hiding and receive death threats. The ultimate goal was to silence Alexander and other voices that opposed the narrative, allowing the media to control the narrative and sway public opinion towards mail-in voting. Despite the challenges, Alexander and other scientists continued to advocate for natural immunity and herd immunity, emphasizing the importance of children in the response.
Media as a destructive force: The media functions as an arm of intelligence services and corporations, aiming to manipulate and brainwash the population, with potential for financial retaliation against critics.
The media, particularly in North America, can be a destructive force. The speaker shares his personal experience of being targeted and isolated by the media during a time of national news, causing him great distress. He believes that the media functions as an arm of intelligence services and corporations, aiming to manipulate and brainwash the population rather than inform or educate. The speaker also mentions the potential for financial retaliation, such as stopping salaries, to further silence critics. Despite this, the speaker encourages support for those facing media scrutiny and the need to find alternative means to continue their work when traditional careers are threatened. The speaker's experience underscores the power of the media to shape public perception and the importance of standing up for truth and transparency in the face of adversity.
Speaking against the norm can lead to intense scrutiny: Doctors and scientists risk losing reputation, income, and face threats for challenging established narratives, but having strong support systems and standing firm in beliefs can help weather attacks.
Speaking out against the norm can be met with intense scrutiny and attacks from the media and academic communities. Doctors and scientists, like Ahmed, who challenge established narratives risk losing their reputation, income, and even face physical threats. However, having strong support systems and standing firm in one's beliefs can help weather these attacks. The media operates as a collective, relentlessly targeting individuals who go against their narrative, aiming to destroy their lives and careers. Despite the challenges, it's essential to continue fighting for what is right.
Donald Trump as a canary in the coal mine: Despite personal damage, Trump exposed deep-rooted issues, benefits may come later, small group of determined individuals can make a difference.
Donald Trump can be seen as a "canary in the coal mine," exposing the deep-rooted issues in Washington D.C. and the media, despite facing significant damage himself. However, the improvements and benefits from his actions may not come during his time, but rather in the future when new leaders are ready to finish the job. The speaker was encouraged by meeting doctors who shared similar views but felt disappointed that they were not taking more action, as they had more to lose. The speaker emphasized that a small group of determined individuals can make a significant impact, as shown in the American Revolution. The speaker expressed sadness and frustration towards those who know the truth but choose to stay quiet and not take action.
Advocating for Early Treatment Against Government Protocols: Paul and his team believe early COVID-19 treatment is crucial and fight against harmful government protocols, despite opposition and attempts to silence them. They emphasize informed decision-making based on true risks and benefits of interventions.
The speaker, Paul, and his team have been advocating for early treatment and against government protocols regarding COVID-19, as they believe these protocols cause more harm than good. They have faced opposition and attempts to silence them, but they have continued to fight, believing they are on the right side of history. The speaker expresses disappointment in those who praise him but don't take action themselves, as they want the benefits without taking on the risks. They are fighting for the health and well-being of all, especially the vulnerable populations like the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions. The speaker emphasizes the importance of understanding the true risks and benefits of various COVID-19 interventions, such as vaccines and treatments, and making informed decisions based on that information. The speaker also criticizes the use of false positive PCR tests and harmful treatments like remdesivir in hospitals. The team has faced challenges, but they believe their efforts have prevented mass vaccinations and lockdowns, and they will continue to stand their ground.
COVID-19 primarily affects those with underlying medical conditions and older adults: COVID-19 primarily impacts those with pre-existing health conditions and older adults, contrary to claims that it kills beyond average life expectancy. Healthy children have not died from it.
COVID-19, a respiratory virus, did not kill beyond the average life expectancy as some may claim. The virus primarily affects those with underlying medical conditions and older adults, as is the case with other coronaviruses and influenza. Moreover, the data from the CDC and various countries indicates that no healthy child has died from COVID-19. Despite this, efforts have been made to manipulate data and push vaccines on parents. It's crucial to remember that science is not settled and is based on constant questioning and reexamining. The person who claimed "I am science" and "the science is settled" shows a lack of understanding of the scientific process. It's important to stay informed, question information, and adhere to principles and facts.
![The Lab Leak [TEASER]](https://www.podcastworld.io/podcast-images/if-books-could-kill-48debbjf.webp)
